Event Report | Supporting positive relationships between prisoners and their families
In February 2016, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) organised a roundtable meeting on the maintenance
of family ties during imprisonment with a view to informing the prison reform and transformation
programmes. The meeting was chaired by Anne Fox, Chief Executive Officer of Clinks; this paper
compiles evidence and the views of Clinks members in response to questions posed at that meeting.
In 2004, a Children and Families Pathway was included in the National Offender Management
Service (NOMS) National Reducing Re-offending Action Plan. 1 The pathway provided a framework
for maintaining family relationships supported by better advice and guidance material for families
and children, the integration of relationship and parenting skills into mainstream support and the
engagement of the voluntary, community and faith sectors.
It was a significant development to acknowledge that families experience a ‘hidden sentence’ when
a family member is imprisoned. However, while recognising the transformative impact of many
good quality and innovative services, a study by NOMS and the Department for Business Innovation
and Skills (DBIS) found ‘something of a gap between the national vision and the execution at the
front line in commissioning family services’. 2 This experience is shared by many Clinks members
working with the partners, children and families of offenders.
What are the barriers to maintaining and improving family ties in prison and how can these be
addressed?
A number of reports have highlighted the myriad obstacles to promoting family ties. These range
from the difficulties of maintaining quality contact with families, the patchy delivery of family
support and engagement services and insufficient use of existing research and knowledge, including
families’ own experiences, to inform the development of new services.
Obstacles to maintaining quality contact
The main routes for contact are letters and other communications by post, phone calls, social visits,
family days and contact outside of the prison when the offender is Released On Temporary Licence
1
(ROTL). The extent to which method is available is determined by the individual prison regime,
including the application of the Incentives and Earned Privileges System.
Convicted prisoners are allowed one free letter a week and can send additional letters at their own
costs. There is a possible issue for imprisoned parents who may wish to send letters to their child, if
the person with parental responsibility for the child decides that the child should not receive any
further correspondence. Family members can, where available, use the email a prisoner scheme.
Both of these types of contact rely on adequate literacy skills.
Phones provide instant contact with partners and children, but there is variable practice for phone
access across the secure estate. An HMI Thematic Report on the first 24 hours in custody noted that
delays in approving PIN phone numbers is common. Between a quarter and a third of prisoners
reported problems with contacting a family member and accessing phone numbers. 3 This is a
particularly stressful time for both prisoners and families with concerns about each other’s welfare.
As well as delays in approving PINs, accessing phones in prisons can be notoriously difficult. A
prisoner at HMP Risley described three working phones for the use of 120 prisoners available for one
hour:
"Every act of violence I have witnessed here has been due to the phones, or lack of them. The
situation is open to bullying and causes mental distress to those who can't phone home." 4
Face-to-face visits are important to both prisoners and their families and, it is argued, should be
consistently treated as a family intervention, rather than a security risk. 5 However, there are a
number of challenges at all stages. Firstly, booking a visit itself can be difficult. NOMS Service
Specification for Visits Booking makes it mandatory that the booking process is ‘user friendly and
meets the needs of social and professional visitors’ as well as ‘responsive to social and professional
visitor feedback’.6 While the internet booking system is often effective, feedback from families and
prisons suggest that the telephone booking system can be inadequately staffed, resulting in visits
not being booked. Telephone bookings remain important because they enable visitors – especially
those new to prison visits or a new regime – to ask questions about what to expect. Families value
information about the prison visit process before the first visit, including information about visit
facilities, visitor centre provision, how and where to book on arrival and security arrangements. 7
2
The number, frequency and length of visits differ from prison to prison. ‘Family-friendly’ facilities,
such as the availability of crèches and play provision in visiting halls and visit centres are also
inconsistent. In a review of the Children and Families Pathway across prisons in the south west,
families’ experiences ranged from ‘a bare waiting room with no information, toys or refreshments’,
to welcoming centres with refreshments, play facilities and information. In addition, the formal
structure of visitor halls are a difficult environment for families with young children; many report
locked toy boxes and unstaffed play rooms, lack of facilities for older children and the emotional
pain of having minimal physical contact with the imprisoned family member. The quality of visits can
also be affected by the lack of consistent staffing which impedes the development of positive
relationships between family members and staff and reduces the willingness of prisons to invest in
appropriate staff training.
The distance that families travel to visit a prisoner has an impact on contact. This is a significant
issue for women prisoners, prisoners Imprisoned for Public Protection (IPP) and families visiting
prisoners in military detention facilities. In 2008, it was estimated that women were held on average
62 miles away from their home. 8 The closure of HMP Holloway will have a profound effect on
children from London if their mothers are transferred to HMP Send and HMP Bronzefield.
An effective opportunity to nurture family relationships is through family days. These offer longer,
more informal visits with families carrying out activities together. Again, the frequency and
availability varies from prison to prison and may be affected by available resources; they are at risk
of being cancelled if there is insufficient staff to supervise them. On occasion, family days may be
provided at the expense of social visits for the rest of the prison population. 9 Although valued,
children visiting with a number of other family members can miss opportunities to discuss private
matters with their parents. 10
ROTL offers an opportunity for prisoners to spend time with their families in a more informal and
familiar environment. A useful family intervention, it plays a valuable role maintaining family ties
and enabling prisoners to attend key family events such as birthdays and births. However, lack of
resources and the placement of prisoners at a distance from home can impact on this.
Maintaining contact can place a financial burden on families. The emailing scheme costs 35p per
email. A first class stamp is 63p. Calls from prison phones cost around 9p a minute to landlines and
between 13p and 20p a minute to mobiles. 11 The families of prisoners may send in stamps, clothes
3
and money for phone calls and toiletries – a postal order costs between 50p and £12.50 to buy. The
costs of travelling to and from visits can also be substantial. One partner of an IPP prisoner
interviewed by Clinks estimated that her partner’s imprisonment has cost her around £19,000 in the
last ten years.
Examples of good practice in maintaining contact with families
Low literacy is a big challenge for many prisoners, including a significant number of Gypsy, Traveller
and Romany (GTR) prisoners. HMP Ford has developed a model of good practice for working with
GTR prisoners. Strong family ties are the bedrock of GTR culture, but poor literacy, a nomadic
lifestyle and the cost of calling mobile phones present challenges to maintaining contact. The prison
developed the Gypsy PIN allowing GTR prisoners to transfer additional funds from their private funds
onto their pin number. 12 Foreign nationals are permitted a short phone call abroad instead of visits.
HMP Lowdham Grange has installed telephones in prisoners’ cells. Calls are made to approved
numbers, paid for in advance and can be monitored. Serco have noted definite benefits:
"… significant improvements in prison security, including a marked reduction in attempts to smuggle
mobile phones into the establishment… The number of prisoners failing random mandatory drug
tests also fell following the introduction of the scheme… Prisoner safety improved – there were fewer
assaults, less bullying and fewer incidents of self-harm. Prisoners could make phone calls in more
decent conditions, and the frequency and quality of contact with their families increased.” 13
The Acorn House initiative at HMP Askham Grange nurtures ties between imprisoned mothers and
their children by enabling them to stay together for 48 hours. The building is within the prison’s
grounds, but there is no staff intervention other than the provision of meals. There is no specific
criteria for selecting mothers to participate; it depends on individual needs and circumstances.
However, the mothers must work with the Family Learning Team to develop a plan of activities for
the visit while a Family Support Worker helps mothers anticipate and resolve potential difficulties.
West Yorkshire Family Meditation Service offers dedicated help to improve communication and
strengthen family connections. The mothers, children and young people, prison staff and carers are
highly positive and see Acorn House as a valued resource:
4
‘It was the opportunity to do ordinary activities, at their own pace, without other people present,
that was particularly appreciated’. 14
Children also appreciated the chance to have private conversations with their mother that were not
possible during routine family visits.
Family support and engagement services
Family support services can be grouped under four broad categories:
•
Maintaining family relationships
•
Parental learning and skill-building
•
Family based interventions
•
Family support casework
There are many examples of well-regarded services, often provided by the voluntary sector,
supporting families at different stages of the Criminal Justice System (CJS). However, again, access
for prisoners and their families is inconsistent. Challenges to universal good practice include:
•
Lack of resources within prisons including limited staff capacity, time and budget and
appropriate space for family activities
•
lack of strategic guidance or prioritisation of children and family work resulting in fewer
prison staff roles with a designated responsibility for children and families
•
inconsistent recording and sharing of data about offenders and their families
•
poor communication within prisons of the provision available for families and children
•
lack of focus on early support to maintain family relationships
•
an inconsistent commissioning process that may not always be based on current evidence,
research or knowledge of the range of services available
•
individual governors lacking the skill or ambition to link up with wider community services
•
inconsistent regard of multiple and diverse needs including women, those from diverse faith,
national and linguistic backgrounds, drug users and IPP prisoners.
5
Examples of good practice
There are many examples of good practice that can potentially be replicated, scaled up or adapted
for use across the prison estate.
Barnardo’s employed two workers based in HMP Hewell and HMP Oakwood. They offered
emotional and practical support for imprisoned parents and the parent or carer in the community,
as well as one-to-one therapeutic sessions for school-aged children affected by imprisonment. The
project offered a point of contact and support for prison staff and was able to signpost families to
relevant services. The project noted positive outcomes in terms of family relationships, engagement
with services, a reduction in offending, victimisation and the impact of trauma, parenting and social
skills and increased resilience. 15
A number of parenting and relationship programmes work with offenders and their families. Safe
Ground programmes such as Family Man and Fathers Inside use drama, fiction, group discussion and
games to explore identity, family relationships and parenting skills. The course also aims to
challenge thinking that impedes desistance and helps participants develop skills that promote
education and learning opportunities. Pact run Building Stronger Families to improve
communication between prisoners and their families; Building Bridges to strengthen relationships
between young offenders and their families; Inside Stories, using storytelling to help prisoners
engage with their children and Time to Connect, a parenting programme.
Programmes such as Strengthening Families, Strengthening Communities (SFSC) have potential for
use within the CJS. SFSC, delivered and evaluated by the Race Equality Foundation, is an inclusive
evidence-based parenting programme, designed to promote protective factors which are associated
with good parenting and better outcomes for children, often supporting parents at risk of being
marginalised, including Black and minority ethnic parents, teenage parents, parents with learning
disabilities and parents with experience of drugs, alcohol or violence.
The Family Support Alliance – Pact, POPS, Nepacs, and Jigsaw - aims to develop and deliver family
services in prisons in England and Wales by sharing good practice and learning and encouraging the
focus on families as part of a strategy to reduce re-offending. The Alliance has introduced Family
Engagement Workers (FEWs) into prisons. Primarily provided by Pact, FEWs target prisoners in the
early days of custody, the peak risk period, and offer a casework support service for prisoners
6
focused on family issues. The service uses E-Cins case management system which allows data
sharing not only between Pact and prisons, but also with a wide range of community-based agencies
including social services.
Liaison and diversion services identify and assess vulnerable people, including those with substance
misuse problems, learning disabilities and those who may be on the autism spectrum, who come
into contact with the CJS. Assessment information is shared, as appropriate, with different agencies,
to ensure a package of early support. A review of the service highlights the difficulties and stress for
families trying to support their loved one and gain useful and accurate information about the CJS
process. Those who have experienced the service give very positive feedback, especially valuing the
quick, easy and friendly way that support was offered and the positive, non-judgemental attitude of
the staff. The service is commissioned by NHS England and the intention is for a national roll-out
from 2017 to 2018. 16
The use of existing research and knowledge
A key finding of a study on family relationships and offending notes that family relationships are
understood to influence desistance, negatively or positively, but the ‘quality of evidence is mixed’. 17
Following their research, the authors recommended targeted holistic services underpinned by
evidence-based practice that relates to individual prisoners’ circumstances.
Practitioners working with women offenders have suggested that less is known about specific
desistance factors for women. However, there is clear evidence about the impact of imprisonment
on mothers. Separation from children is cited as the most difficult aspect of incarceration; while
stress and anxiety levels for non-mothers eventually diminish over a six-month period, they remain
the same for mothers. Feelings of loss and rejection is also a consistent theme in motivations for
attempting suicide. 18
The evidence base relating to offenders from specific ethnic and faith groups also appears limited.
Yet, ethnic and faith identities can have a profound impact on offenders’ rehabilitation; experiences
of racism, oppression and stereotyping of offenders and their families can challenge the
development of a pro-social identity. The ‘Young Review on improving outcomes for young black
and/or Muslim men in the Criminal Justice System’ offers a detailed insight into the experiences of
Black and Muslim offenders including the role of families in reducing reoffending and resettlement:
7
‘We heard about the stigma attached to offending behaviour and drug and alcohol use within some
Muslim communities where it is viewed as un-Islamic. As a result families and the wider faith
community may reject offenders upon their release. This was described to us as a kind of triple
isolation; within wider society because of ethnicity and faith; within their community and their own
family because of their offending history. This isolation can lead to mental health and wellbeing
needs, which in turn may present a further barrier to desistance.’ 19
The report also points to the importance of families and social capital, which is a key factor for
Bangladeshi offenders, which along with religion, offered access to supportive social networks. It
also finds that for ‘black and dual heritage offenders, relationships with their families did not
produce the same high levels of social capital. This meant they had fewer options to structure their
time via family and familial routes to employment.’
Research, evaluation and measuring outcomes
Many voluntary sector organisations value independent evaluation; for instance, Safe Ground
submit data to the Justice Data Lab. There is a wealth of information on the i–Hop website, a onestop resource hub for professionals supporting the children and families of prisoners. 20 However,
good quality evaluation adds to the costs of delivering services which can cause specific difficulties
for smaller organisations competing for services and can pose challenges to those developing
services with grants which may not cover evaluation costs.
The diversity of services for the families of prisoners means a variety of outcomes, including the
quality and resilience of relationships, specific factors relating to desistance, and quantitative data
such as changes in prisoners’ access to educational opportunities.
National Philanthropy Capital (NPC) led a project to improve the evidence base on the link between
family ties and the likelihood of re-offending. Working with a number of charities, the project
developed a theory of change for charities with a number of shared tools to assess the impact of
organisations’ work with offenders, their children and families. 21
Cambridge University and Ormiston used a longitudinal approach, gathering data from family sets of
parents and children. 22 Data was collected at two key stages in the resettlement process. Firstly,
interviews were carried out with imprisoned fathers, their partners or ex-partners and where
8
appropriate, their children, within four months of the father’s release. Second interviews were
conducted up to six months after the fathers were released. The research explored the impact of
factors such as the quality of family relationships; communication between the father and family
during imprisonment; frequency of contact during imprisonment; involvement of fathers with
children before prison; social support from family and friends; participation in family-oriented
programmes and material resources before imprisonment on resettlement outcomes.
Safe Ground facilitate drama-based family relationship programmes, including their flagship
programmes Family Man and Fathers Inside. They have commissioned a number of evaluations,
collecting and measuring evidence on:
•
The reduction of reoffending (via the Justice Data Lab study)
•
Long-term improvement in family relationships
•
Engagement in further education, training and employment
•
Staff-prisoner relationships
•
Reduction of men receiving adjudication
Geese Theatre use drama-based group work to explore issues such as anger management, violence
and behaviour change with prisoners. Their Journeywoman research project with women prisoners
at HMP Forston involved ‘the use of active exercises, role-plays and theatrical metaphors. The key
themes … are goal setting, problem solving, coping strategies, avoiding re-offending and developing
self-esteem.’ The researchers asked the participants to keep daily diaries ‘to describe their
experiences, their feelings and what they felt they had gained from being involved in the sessions’.
The diaries were analysed and ‘each theme’s relation to other themes was explored and integrated
across the diaries to identify shared themes.’ 23
The impact of visitor centres is difficult to measure; the facilities vary considerably, though evidence
suggests that centres run by the voluntary sector offer a better range of services and support. 24
Jigsaw Visitors Centre, serving visitors to HMP Leeds, commissions an independent evaluation of its
work every two or three years. In addition to managing visitors to the prison, Jigsaw delivers family
support, courses and other projects to prisoners as well as providing café facilities and work
opportunities and training for prisoners. The latest evaluation aimed for a ‘360 degree view’ of
Jigsaw and its services, collecting and analysing data from prisoners, Jigsaw staff, Jigsaw
management committee, HMP Leeds staff, and stakeholders from West Yorkshire Probation Service
and NOMS. 25
9
Nepacs runs seven visitor centres across north east England. They have developed a Visitors’
Charter and proactively seek families’ feedback, including through regular family events and an
annual Visitors’ Voice event for families to feedback their experiences of booking and attending
visits. The Review of the Children and Families Pathway across the south west region includes a
visitor observation checklist covering visit centre provision, prison entry process and the visit hall. 26
Partnership work with different organisations
Evidence suggests value in a partnership model with a range of specialist organisations. The
voluntary sector has a good track record of running visitor centres, but also of working with schools,
children’s centres and other agencies to raise awareness and improve support. Many organisations
that are not recognised as working directly in the CJS support the children and families of offenders.
For example, NCT offers antenatal care for women prisoners at HMP Styal. Working With Men
deliver positive development programmes to marginalised and socially excluded men at risk or with
experience of the CJS. NHS England commissions the Liaison and Diversion service that provides
valued support to the families of vulnerable offenders. There may also be a role for communitybased financial services such as credit unions and advice services.
The Invisible Walls is a multi-agency project supporting prisoners in HMP Parc and their families in
the community. Funded by the Big Lottery Fund, the lead agency G4S works in partnership with
Barnardo's, Bridgend County Council, Gwalia and Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice to cut
intergenerational offending and to reduce re-offending by strengthening family ties. Family
intervention workers based inside the prison and practitioners in the community deliver parenting
programmes, advocacy services, Family Group Conferencing and volunteering programmes. Support
is delivered to the prisoner and their family twelve months prior to release from prison and
continues for up to six months in the community. 27
An Integrated Family Support Programme operates in the north east of England. Developed and
delivered by Nepacs, the programme consists of Integrated Family Support Workers (IFSWs) in HMP
YOI Low Newton, HMP YOI Deerbolt, HMP Holme House and HMP Kirklevington Grange and two
Integrated Family Support Advocates (IFSAs) working across twelve north east local authority areas.
The IFSWs offer practical support such as tracking down family members and professionals for
prisoners when contact has been lost; advocacy for prisoners and their families at meetings;
emotional and listening support; mediation to resolve conflict between prisoners and their families
10
and they also support service providers to identify need by administering questionnaires and
consulting with prisoners and their families. IFSAs develop partnerships within local authorities and
other agencies to build community-based support. A bedrock of the community support is the
‘Hidden Sentence’ training to raise awareness of the experiences of the children and families of
prisoners. The project’s evaluation concluded that:
‘…there is an appetite for this work in both the prisons and in the community. Stakeholders feel it is
good and worthwhile work to be involved in.’
One recommendation was to standardise policy and provision across the local authorities in the
north east and to appoint a Family Support Worker in each prison. 28
Faith-based organisations offer a rich source of emotional and practical support. Prison chaplains
are on call to support prisoners, especially in their first 24 hours of custody. 29 The Review of the
Children and Family Pathway in the south west region noted that chaplains played a significant role
in supporting relationships between prisoners and their families; they host final adoption visits,
support families through traumatic events such as bereavement and relationship break up and help
prisoners through the induction process. 30
The Irish Council for Prisoners Overseas (ICPO) is part of the Irish Chaplaincy in Britain, responding to
the needs of Irish prisoners, including Travellers, in British prisons. The Well is a Community Interest
Company (CIC) based in northern England, providing a community-based rehabilitation approach to
recovery, supporting a significant number of ex-prisoners. It has helped to set up the UK’s first
recovery church.
The Young Review highlights a project with predominantly Muslim offenders, working with local
mosques, communities and families ‘to remind them of the importance of forgiveness as an Islamic
concept’, facilitating effective resettlement:
‘They organised visits for groups of Imams to the local prisons and in so doing challenged the
underlying assumptions about the offenders and contributed towards building the capacity of the
local community to support resettlement and rehabilitation.’ 31
11
Conclusion
The prison reform agenda offers an ideal opportunity to create physical and emotional
environments conducive to strengthening positive family ties and facilitating successful
resettlement. However, support must be continuous and consistent, from the point of arrest
through to resettlement and included as an integral part of the services delivered by Community
Rehabilitation Companies and the National Probation Service. A best practice commissioning model
would enable family interventions to occur at the earliest possible stage. Services should be
effectively targeted, holistic (involving voluntary and public sector partnership), multi-dimensional
and integral to offender management.
Reports and standards have already been developed to assist with planning, delivering and
monitoring family-friendly services. In addition to those mentioned previously, the Framework for
the Support of Families Affected by the Criminal Justice System outlines 11 broad outcomes to
‘present an ideal minimum standard of support that should be available to every family affected by
the criminal justice system’. 32 It covers informed practice (training, policy and practice guidance,
identification and understanding of families’ support needs and information sharing); the inclusion
and engagement of families (enabling families’ understanding of the CJS process, awareness-raising
of support available, inclusion in decision-making); promoting family connections (visiting, physical
and indirect contact) and ensuring that families are safe and well (safeguarding physical and
emotional health and supporting emotional wellbeing and positive life outcomes).
There has been some innovative work in the women’s sector. The new women’s prison replacing
HMP Cornton Vale in Scotland will be built around the needs of women who have suffered trauma.
The accommodation will resemble flats, enabling women to cook for themselves and do their own
laundry. Children will be permitted overnight contact.
Finally, there is a clear message from organisations working with the children and families of
prisoners and from evaluation, research and standards that families and service-users must be
involved in the design and evaluation of services. People in the CJS and their families have expert
knowledge - from the design of new prisons to the services delivered inside them, to the support
received in the community around resettlement and re-engagement in family life.
12
NOMS (2005) The National Reducing Re-Offending Action Plan: A cross-government outline plan for reducing
re-offending
https://www.i-hop.org.uk/ci/fattach/get/51/0/filename/Reducing+Reoffending+Delivery+Plan+2009.pdf
2
Policis, Kingston University, Centre for Abuse and Trauma Studies and Toynbee Hall Parenting and
relationship support programmes for offenders and their families: Executive Summary published by NOMS and
DBIS
https://policis.com/pdf/moj/MOJ_BIS_Parenting_Support_for_offenders_and_families_Executive_Summary_2
80114_FINAL.pdf
3
HM Inspectorate of Prisons (2015) Life in prison: The first 24 hours in prison
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/11/HMIP-First-24hours-findings-paper-web-2015.pdf
4
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/may/17/smuggled-mobile-phones-prison
5
Locked out: Children’s experiences of visiting a parent in prison http://www.barnardos.org.uk/locked-outreport.pdf
6
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278906/2014-0115_Visits_Booking_Specification_P2.1.pdf
7
Wright, P., Garman J. and Carter, T. (2015) South West Prisons’ Review of the Children and Families Pathway
Barnardo’s/NOMS
8
Raikes B. and Lockwood K. (March 2011) Mothering from the Inside – A small scale evaluation of Acorn
House, an overnight child contact facility at HMP Askham Grange Prison Service Journal No 194
9
See South West Prisons’ Review of the Children and Families Pathway p. 35
10
Raikes B. and Lockwood K. (March 2011) Mothering on the Inside – A small scale evaluation of Acorn House,
an overnight child contact facility at HMP Askham Grange Prison Service Journal No. 194
11
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-are-there-so-many-illicit-mobile-phones-in-uk-prisons
12
http://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/GypsyTraveller-good-practice.pdf
13
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/may/17/smuggled-mobile-phones-prison
14
Raikes B. and Lockwood K. (March 2011) Mothering from the Inside – A small scale evaluation of Acorn
House, an overnight child contact facility at HMP Askham Grange Prison Service Journal No 194
15
The slides detailing the project along with others supporting families and children effected by imprisonment
in the West Midlands can be downloaded from:
http://www.i-hop.org.uk/app/answers/detail/a_id/752/kw/wolverhampton
16
Talbot J, Cheung R. and O’Sullivan S (2015) Relative Justice: the experiences and views of family members of
people with particular needs in contact with criminal justice and liaison and diversion services PRT/POPS
http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/relative%20justice.pdf
17
Policis, Kingston University, Centre for Abuse and Trauma Studies and Toynbee Hall Parenting and
relationship support programmes for offenders and their families: Executive Summary published by NOMs and
DBIS
18
See this report for a summary: Raikes B. and Lockwood K. (March 2011) Mothering from the Inside – A small
scale evaluation of Acorn House, an overnight child contact facility at HMP Askham Grange Prison Service
Journal No 194
19
http://www.youngreview.org.uk/sites/default/files/clinks_young-review_report_dec2014.pdf
20
http://www.i-hop.org.uk/app/home
21
Ní Ógáin E., Svistak M.and de Las Casas L. (March 2013) Blueprint for shared measurement Developing,
designing and implementing shared approaches to impact measurement
22
Lösel F., Pugh G., Markson L., Souza K.A. and Lanskey C. (2012) Risk and protective factors in the resettlement
of imprisoned fathers with their families University of Cambridge and Ormiston
23
http://artsevidence.org.uk/media/uploads/research-report-geese-theatre.pdf
24
Wright, P., Garman J. and Carter, T. South West Prisons’ Review of the Children and Families Pathway
November 2015 NOMS
25
Woodall J, Dixey R., Kinsella K. and Braybrook D. (2015) Jigsaw Visitors’ Centre Evaluation
http://eprints.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/1359/6/Jigsaw%20report%202015_Final.pdf
26
Wright, P., Garman J. and Carter, T. South West Prisons’ Review of the Children and Families Pathway
November 2015 NOMS
27
A short film about Invisible Walls can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPbfX4DtP70
1
13
Barefoot Research and Evaluation (2013) Helping prisoners maintain family relationships and supporting
children and families affected by imprisonment: Evaluation of the Integrated Family Support Programme in the
North East
http://www.ihop.org.uk/ci/fattach/get/15/0/filename/NEPACS+Evaluation+of+Integrated+Family+Support+Pr
ogramme.pdf
29
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/11/HMIP-First-24hours-findings-paper-web-2015.pdf
30
Wright, P., Garman J. and Carter, T. South West Prisons’ Review of the Children and Families Pathway
November 2015 NOMS
31
http://www.youngreview.org.uk/sites/default/files/clinks_young-review_report_dec2014.pdf p.39
32
http://www.familiesoutside.org.uk/content/uploads/2016/02/Families-Framework-FINAL-July-2015-v3.pdf
28
14